| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
22 Jul 2004 : Column 427W—continued
Benefit Payment Arrangements
Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many pensioners received benefit payments by order book on the latest date for which figures are available; and by what date he expects all pensioners to have transferred to the new system. [175928]
Mr. Pond: There were 5,270,170 order book accounts held by pensioners, live and in payment from the latest data available at 17 April 2004. Payments due from March 2005 will be made by a different method of payment.
Benefit Processing Centres
Mrs. Mahon:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) if he will list the locations, broken down by parliamentary constituencies, of all the offices identified in his announcement on 29 June relating to the centralisation of benefit processing centres; [184335]
22 Jul 2004 : Column 428W
(2) if he will list the locations, broken down by parliamentary constituencies, of each of the proposed benefit processing centres referred to in his announcement on 29 June; and within what timescale decisions on the locations of the remaining benefit processing centres will be made; [184336]
(3) what the proposed timescale is for carrying out the centralisation of benefit processing referred to in his announcement on 29 June. [184337]
Maria Eagle: The offices impacted by the announcement on 29 June were the ten pension centres referred to in the following table, together with details of the constituency in which each is located:
| Office | Constituency |
|---|---|
| Burnley Pension Centre | Burnley |
| Derby Pension Centre | Derby South |
| Liverpool Pension Centre | Liverpool Walton |
| Norwich (Baltic House) Pension Centre | Norwich South |
| Nottingham Pension Centre | Nottingham South |
| Plymouth Pension Centre | Plymouth, Devonport |
| Stockton Pension Centre | Stockton South |
| Wolverhampton Pension Centre | Wolverhampton South West |
| Wrexham Pension Centre | Wrexham |
| York Pension Centre | Ryedale |
Of the 10 sites identified, six will become part of the Jobcentre Plus Network predominantly as benefit processing centres. These are Derby, Norwich (Baltic house) Nottingham, Wolverhampton, Stockton and Wrexham.
The plans for the remaining pension centres are being developed and we are looking for opportunities to transfer estate and people to other parts of the department, other Government Departments or the private sector. I will inform the House as soon as plans are final and firm decisions are made.
The announcement also signalled the intention of Jobcentre Plus to begin centralising their processing work—moving from a large number of dispersed sites nationally to a smaller number of larger sites.
Detailed planning work is currently underway to determine the number and location of these sites. I will report these locations when planning is complete. The centralisation of benefit processing will be implemented in a rolling programme for completion by 2008 at the latest.
Child Support Agency
Mr. Lyons: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will require the Child Support Agency to copy to hon. Members' letters which it sends to constituents whose cases hon. Members have taken up with the Agency. [181991]
Mr. Pond:
The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
22 Jul 2004 : Column 429W
Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. John Lyons, dated 22 July 2004:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will require the Child Support Agency to copy to hon. Members letters which it sends to constituents whose cases hon. Members have taken up with the Agency.
The Agency wishes to understand and where possible to meet the needs of Members of Parliament. It does not automatically copy to Members letters which it sends to constituents whose cases Members have taken up with the Agency. It will carefully consider any such request on a case by case basis.
Mr. Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Strathkelvin and Bearsden (Mr. Lyons) of 7 July 2004, Official Report, column 758W, on the Child Support Agency, for what reasons cases have been moved from the old to the new computer system; and if he will make a statement. [185013]
Mr. Pond: Cases will move from the old to the new computer system if they are linked to a case in the new child support scheme. Some cases will subsequently convert to the new scheme. These will include, for example, cases where a non-resident parent who already has an old scheme assessment is also the non-resident parent in relation to a new scheme application.
It would neither be fair nor workable for people to have a liability under two different schemes, so it is best to move these linked cases onto the new scheme together.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the projected costs are of closing the Basingstoke Child Support Agency office; and how long he expects it will take to recover those costs. [183285]
Mr. Pond: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. Mike Hancock, dated 22 July 2004:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the projected costs are of closing the Basingstoke Child Support Agency office; and how long he expects it will take to recover those costs.
We are currently engaging elsewhere in the Department for Work and Pensions and with other Government Departments to consider potential re-deployment opportunities. Until that work is complete we will not take a final decision on the closure of the Basingstoke site and are thus unable to finalise the business case and therefore the associated costs.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what plans he has to re-deploy staff when the Basingstoke Child Support Agency office closes. [183287]
Mr. Pond:
The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
22 Jul 2004 : Column 430W
Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. Mike Hancock, dated 22 July 2004:
In reply to your recent parliamentary question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what plans he has to re-deploy staff when the Basingstoke Child Support Agency office closes. The Agency developed a Redeployment Plan that is being shared with the relevant trade unions. As part of that, we are engaging elsewhere within the Department for Work and Pensions and with other Government Departments to establish potential re-deployment options. Alongside this all staff in Basingstoke have been seen to establish their preferences. Additional skilled staff have been allocated to support this activity.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what organisations he consulted and what representations he has received from (a) the local council and (b) other interested bodies on the proposal to close the Basingstoke Child Support Agency office. [183289]
Mr. Pond: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. Mike Hancock, dated 22 July 2004:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what organisations he consulted and what representations he has received from (a) the local council and (b) other interested bodies on the proposal to close the Basingstoke Child Support Agency office.
A public consultation commencing on 19 June 2003, formed part of the Lyons Review. It created a total of 207 responses, of which, 105 came from Local Authorities and 11 from interested parties. A full list of consultation respondents can be found in the Lyons Report (appendix 2), along with details of the representations made.
The Agency is committed to a policy of open communications with its staff. It therefore told people of its intention to cease its operations in Basingstoke at the earliest opportunity. Formal consultation is now taking place with staff and trade unions. We are currently engaging elsewhere in the Department for Work and Pensions and with other Government Departments to consider potential redeployment opportunities. Until that work is complete we will not take a final decision on the closure of the Basingstoke site. No representations have been received from the local council or any other interested body other than the Public and Commercial Services Union.
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether a business case has been drawn up to support the closure of the Child Support Agency office in Basingstoke; and if he will make a statement. [183581]
Mr. Pond [holding answer 15 July 2004]: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. John McDonnell, dated 22 July 2004:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether a business case has been drawn up to support the closure of the Child Support Agency office in Basingstoke; and if he will make a statement.
Our intention is to maximise the deployment of staff elsewhere in the Department for Work and Pensions. We are currently in discussions with colleagues elsewhere in the Department and until these discussions are complete no final decision on the closure of the Basingstoke site will be taken. No business case can be finalised until we have been able to quantify those alternative opportunities.
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what consultation was undertaken before the announcement of the closure of the Child Support Agency office in Basingstoke. [183582]
Mr. Pond [holding answer 15 July 2004]: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. John McDonnell, dated 22 July 2004:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what consultation was undertaken before the announcement of the closure of the Child Support Agency office in Basingstoke.
The Agency is committed to a policy of open communications with its staff. It therefore told people of its intention to cease its operations in Basingstoke at the earliest opportunity. Formal consultation is now taking place with staff and trade unions. Our intention is to maximise the deployment of staff elsewhere in the Department for Work and Pensions. We are currently in discussions with colleagues elsewhere in the Department. Until these discussions are complete no final decision on the closure of the Basingstoke site will be taken.
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what options have been considered as alternatives to the closure of the Basingstoke Child Support Agency office. [183583]
Mr. Pond [holding answer 15 July 2004]: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. John McDonnell, dated 22 July 2004:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what options have been considered as alternatives to the closure of the Basingstoke Child Support Agency office.
We are charged with reducing the size of our estate based on an expectation of a significant reduction in headcount. Basingstoke falls within the geographic region covered by the Lyons Review and we have accepted the findings of this review. We are intending to move the Agency's operations from Basingstoke in line with the review and a direct alternative was not therefore considered.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |